On Being a Great Man’s Child and Perspective

The son, at work in the tobacco fields as his father learned he had become President, was asked about his reaction to the historic promotion of his father. The son, Calvin Jr., gave an answer that underscored the quiet confidence inherited from his father and the humble perspective that both parents passed to their child. “Oh, naturally I feel quite proud,” the boy said, “but I don’t intend to allow it to interfere with my plans. Dad’s becoming President will make no changes in the family plans as far as I can see. John and I are going to return to our home in Northampton, for I think that all of the members of the family have expressed themselves from time to time that no place but Northampton could be our home. I’m sure I would rather be here than in the White House, too…This is the best kind of vacation, working on a farm,” Calvin observed, “I’d much rather do it than go to camp or the seashore. Some wonder why I work as hard as this after what has happened to Dad, but, really, how is that going to help me any? I shall have my own way to make, my own career to work out, and I wouldn’t feel right in laying down now by trying to get by on my father’s success. I really want to make good like Dad and there’s only one way to do it.”

Work.

The boy was but fifteen.

                          Image

On “Father” Coolidge

It was on this day in the cold of March eighty-seven years ago that “Colonel” John Coolidge, the father of the President, died. His oldest grandson and namesake, would recall the words of Calvin Coolidge spoken in an interview six months after “Grandfather Coolidge” passed. The thirtieth president had this to say about the man popularly known around the nation as “Colonel” Coolidge, the notary who had sworn in his son three years before:

“My father had qualities that were greater than any I possess. He was a man of untiring industry and great tenacity of purpose…He always stuck to the truth. It always seemed possible for him to form an unerring judgment of men and things. I can not recall that I ever knew of his doing a wrong thing. He would classed as decidedly a man of character. I have no doubt he is representative of a great mass of Americans who are known only to their local neighbors; nevertheless, they are really great. It would be difficult to say that he had a happy life. He never seemed to be seeking happiness. He was a firm believer in hard work. Death visited the family often. But I have no doubt he took a satisfaction in accomplishment and always stood ready to meet any duty that came to him. He did not fear the end of life, but looked forward to it as a reunion with all he had loved and lost.”

Such regard for the qualities of men like Calvin’s father deserve both mention and honor. They are no less imperative if a proper perspective of the family and society is to be preserved. In the haste to jettison all that is masculine in culture, an irreplaceable and detrimental cavity has been opened. Devoid of the particular kind of strength supplied by fathers, like John, homes are compromised and civilization, without these crucial pillars, collapses underneath the weight of its own weakness.

                Image

On the Strength of “Weakness”

While there is much in Michael J. Gerhardt’s new book, “The Forgotten Presidents: Their Untold Constitutional Legacy,” with which this author disagrees, he ably shows that Coolidge was anything but a pushover or “weak” president. Devoting chapter twelve of his book to the thirtieth president, Gerhardt demonstrates that Coolidge had unique strength when it came to his constitutional role and the exercise of presidential powers. Coolidge, perhaps more than any of his immediate contemporaries in the office, understood both the limits and the authority vested in the Presidency. His display of leadership was unprecedented in a number of ways.

As the previous administration’s scandals went public, it was Coolidge who took the incredible step of ensuring honorable and qualified investigators (not party hacks) took the helm after which he never intervened in the process to determine the facts. The investigation was allowed to find the guilty and acquit suspicion of the innocent. As a result of both their thorough competence and Coolidge setting a tone of full cooperation from the beginning, public trust in the law was preserved.

In the use of the pardon and the veto, Coolidge distinguishes himself as anything but a timid President. Of his twenty-nine predecessors, and his immediate successor, he ranks second only to Wilson in the number of pardons granted during his time. Of his 1,545, his most noteworthy were made at the beginning of his administration, on behalf of several who had been imprisoned for their public criticism of Wilson’s involvement in the War. Even more extraordinary was the fact that he issued these pardons not only over his Attorney General’s opposition but also before request for release had been made. His fifty vetoes stand also set Coolidge apart from his contemporaries. Only Teddy Roosevelt would issue more of them in the first thirty years of the twentieth century. Not until Teddy’s cousin would the record be broken. Standing in the company of Roosevelts, Coolidge can hardly be classified a passive President. Like Grover Cleveland before him, Coolidge would use the “pocket veto” with great effect as well. By allowing a bill to die after ten days unsigned during Congressional recess, Coolidge would leave a lasting impact on the potency of the veto. His firm dissent from McNary-Haugen — twice — ensured that the President’s role in preventing bad legislation remains intact.

Coolidge’s political courage is even lesser known but just as dominant in his protection of the constitutional power to appoint officers of the Executive Branch. The earliest tussles with Congress demonstrated Coolidge could retain his nerves, remain unmoved by “mob” demands for this or that resignation and eventually prevail despite intense political heat. His resolve was not merely stubbornness but rather an abiding sense of duty and integrity. He would not join the crowd in a political lynching, however badly they wanted it. He was fair even to those who proved unfit for responsibility. He would not give in to appearances nor would he condone wrongdoing. As pointed out by others, it actually takes more strength to refrain from acting until the right moment — especially in the heat of the moment — than it is to be seen doing something now to appease onlookers with appearances. It was Coolidge who exemplified the strength of character required for decisive action only when the fullness of time warranted it. Not before. His strength, considered “weakness” by many even today, is a necessary component of wise leadership. To discount this quality is to misunderstand and fail to appreciate what makes good leaders.